Justia Mississippi Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Alan and Linda Anderson filed a medical malpractice action against Sharkey Issaquena Community Hospital but failed to designate an expert timely in accordance with the scheduling order imposed by the Circuit Court. The Andersons filed their expert designation out of time, along with a motion for continuance. The hospital moved to strike the expert designation and moved for summary judgment. The circuit court granted a continuance to the Andersons and denied both the hospital’s motion to strike and its motion for summary judgment. The hospital filed an interlocutory appeal to challenge the denial of its motion for summary judgment. But after review, and finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed the Circuit Court. View "Sharkey Issaquena Community Hospital v. Anderson" on Justia Law

The issue this case presented for the Mississippi Supreme Court's review centered on the validity of a 1995 Florida divorce decree. Sarath Sapukotana (Sarath) and Palihawadanage Ramya Chandralatha Fernando (Fernando) were married in Sri Lanka in 1992. Sarath moved to the United States a year later. In 1995, a Florida court entered an uncontested divorce decree, dissolving the marriage of Sarath and Fernando. In 2004, Sarath then married Martha Gay Weaver Sapukotana (Martha) in Mississippi. Sarath died intestate in 2008 from injuries which led to a wrongful death suit. The trial court granted Martha’s petition to be named the administratrix of the estate, over the objection of Fernando, Sarath’s first wife. This allowed Martha to file, and later to settle, the wrongful death claim. Fernando claims that the 1995 Florida divorce decree was fraudulent and void for lack of service of process, and that she instead was the rightful beneficiary to Sarath’s estate and to the proceeds of the wrongful death action. Fernando filed a motion to vacate the chancery court’s decision to appoint Martha as administratrix of Sarath’s estate. The chancery court dismissed Fernando’s motion and held that Martha was the rightful beneficiary to Sarath’s estate. Fernando appealed. The Supreme Court affirmed the chancery court, finding that the chancery court lacked authority to vacate the 1995 Florida divorce decree. View "In Re: In the Matter of the Estate of Sarath Sapukotana" on Justia Law

Deborah Jackson sued Illinois Central Railroad Company under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) for the wrongful death of her husband, Charles. Jackson alleged that her husband’s death from lung cancer was caused by his exposure to asbestos while working for the railroad. After the close of discovery, Illinois Central filed a motion for summary judgment and a motion to strike Jackson’s expert, Michael Ellenbecker. Later, Illinois Central moved to strike improper evidence from Jackson’s response to the motion for summary judgment. When Jackson attempted to supplement Ellenbecker’s designation at the summary-judgment hearing, Illinois Central moved ore tenus to strike the supplementation. The Circuit Court denied all of Illinois Central’s motions. Illinois Central appealed. After review, the Mississippi Supreme Court found that Jackson’s expert designation of Ellenbecker was improper summary-judgment evidence because it was not sworn to upon personal knowledge and constituted inadmissible hearsay. Because the supplemental response was unsworn and never was filed, it also was improper. And, because Jackson could not show a genuine issue of material fact without Ellenbecker’s testimony, the Court reversed the denial of summary judgment and rendered judgment in favor of Illinois Central. View "Illinois Central Railroad Company v. Jackson" on Justia Law

Following Steve Broome’s death, his ex-wife Elizabeth Strickland and his children, Stephen Broome and Jesse Broome, filed claims against Steve’s estate for child support arrears, other unpaid support obligations, and for life insurance proceeds. The chancellor dismissed all of the claims, holding that the claims were not valid because they were not reduced to a judgment before Steve’s death and that the claims were barred by res judicata. After review, the Supreme Court held that the chancellor erred in dismissing the claims, since Elizabeth, Stephen, and Jesse presented sufficient evidence to satisfy Mississippi Code Section 91-7-149. The case was reversed and remanded for further proceedings. View "Strickland v. Estate of Steve Alan Broome" on Justia Law

This case centered on a dispute between Gerald Scafidi and his sister, Jo Ann Hille about three family corporations and the land they inherited from their parents. Unable to get along, each sibling ran one of the corporations essentially as a sole proprietorship, while the third corporation ceased to do business. The sister, unhappy with the deadlock, brought this suit to end her business dealings with her brother and divide the assets. The chancellor found that the parties had failed to observe corporate formalities, so they were not entitled to the protections of the corporate form. The chancellor made an equitable distribution and granted each party full ownership of separate companies and then adjusted the property lines to grant each sibling a fifty-percent interest in the land. One corporation that could not be divided was sold by agreed order and the proceeds of the sale were divided between the siblings. Other parts of the ruling addressed attorney’s fees, expert fees, unpaid taxes, the BP settlement, and other matters. Gerald appealed, arguing that the chancellor erred by not following the statutory framework for dissolving and distributing corporate assets according to stated ownership interests. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Scafidi v. Hille" on Justia Law

Graham Warwick appealed his conviction for driving under the influence of marijuana, arguing that his conviction is against the weight and sufficiency of the evidence. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Warwick v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Dawn Jodoin and Chris Different married in February 2005 while they were living in South Carolina. Jodoin’s two children, B.B. and J.B., also lived with them. In May 2010, Jodoin and Different moved to Rankin County, Mississippi, with Different’s sister and her husband. B.B. was fourteen years old and entering the ninth grade at the time the family moved to Rankin County. After about a month and a half, Jodoin and Different moved to Pearl, Mississippi. Jodoin decided to end her marriage with Different in 2011. B.B. and J.B. moved back to South Carolina in August 2011, and Jodoin moved back in September 2011. Jodoin and Different’s divorce was finalized in January 2012. The following month, Jodoin married Brian Jodoin. In February 2012, while living in Ohio, B.B. told her younger brother, J.B., that Different had sexually assaulted her. J.B. told Brian, and Brian told Jodoin. Jodoin took B.B. to a counselor, and the counselor contacted the Department of Human Services about the abuse. Different would ultimately be found guilty and convicted of one count of gratification of lust and one count of sexual battery. Different was sentenced to fifteen years for Count I, Gratification of Lust, and thirty years for Count II, Sexual Battery, to be served concurrently. He appealed, challenging the evidence presented against him. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed Different's conviction and sentence. View "Different v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Safeway Insurance issued Tiffany Dukes an automobile insurance policy on her car. Dukes' boyfriend, Robert Hudson, was driving Dukes' car when he was involved in an accident that injured Jeffrey Piggs. Dukes sought coverage for the accident under her policy, but Safeway disputed coverage, claiming the policy was void due to Dukes' failure to list Hudson as a regular, frequent driver on her application for insurance. The trial court granted Safeway partial summary judgment because Dukes and Hudson refused to cooperate with Safeway’s investigation; however, the trial court also found that Safeway was responsible to provide $25,000 of liability coverage, even though Hudson was not listed as a regular, frequent driver on the policy. Following the trial court’s denial of a motion for reconsideration, Safeway appealed, via petition for interlocutory appeal, to the Court. Finding that the trial court erred in its holding, the Supreme Court reversed and rendered summary judgment in Safeway's favor. View "Safeway Insurance Co. v.Dukes" on Justia Law

James Hobson placed the highest bid at a foreclosure sale on real property in Warren County. The receipt Hobson obtained at the sale disclaimed that the sale was subject to withdrawal in the event of a timely reinstatement by the obligor on the deed of trust. The day before the sale, the defaulting obligor on the deed of trust reinstated the loan with Chase Home Finance, the obligee, and Priority Trustee Services of Mississippi, the trustee. Although Hobson’s check was returned, he sued Chase and Priority for breach of contract, arguing that he was entitled to receive the difference in the amount he had bid for the property and the appraised value of the property. The County Court initially granted summary judgment to Hobson and the Circuit Court affirmed; but the Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a determination of whether the obligor validly reinstated her loan prior to the foreclosure sale. On remand, the County Court granted summary judgment to Chase and Priority and the Circuit Court affirmed. Finding no error in the respective judgments of the County and Circuit Courts, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Hobson v. Chase Home Finance, LLC" on Justia Law

Defendant was charged with thirteen counts of video voyeurism. At a bench trial, the parties agreed to forego calling witnesses and to have the trial judge decide the case on a submission of stipulated facts. The stipulation omitted any reference to where ten of the thirteen counts took place. So, because the State failed to prove venue as to those ten counts, the Supreme Court reversed them. The Court affirmed defendant's remaining convictions. View "Nuckolls v. Mississippi" on Justia Law